221–230 of 657 posts
[flagged]
You from 2 months ago:
>LLMs are great coders, but subpar developers". https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46434304
Interesting. That's a lot of progress in 2 months!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It was a slog, and it also made me look bad because it took me forever compared to the team who originally churned it out almost instantly. The hell you are playing hero for? Delegate the choice to manager: ruin the codebase or allocate two weeks for clean-up - their choice. If the magical AI team claim they can do integration faster - let them.
IME one thing that makes this choice a very difficult one is oncall responsibilities. The thing that incentivizes code owners to keep their house in order is that their oncall experience will be a lot better. And you're the only one who is incentivized to think this way. Management certainly doesn't care. So by delegating the choice to management you're signing up for a whole bunch of extra work in the form of sleepl…
IME too many don't care about on call unless they are personally affected.
The majority of code I've written since November 2025 has been created using agents, as opposed to me typing code into a text editor. More than half of that has been done from my iPhone via Claude Code for web (bad name, great software.) I'm enjoying myself so much . Projects I've been thinking about for years are now a couple of hours of hacking around. I'm readjusting my mental model of what's possible as a single…
How often do you find issues during review? What kinds of issues?
Occasionally I'll catch things it didn't implement at all, or find things like missing permission checks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're trusting AI to trade with your real money?
I mean, real algo trading shops use "AI" to do it all the time, they just don't use LLMs. While I'm not the GP I think the idea they're trying to express is that the nuts and bolts of structuring programs is going away. The engineer of today, according to this claim and similar to Karpathy's Software 3.0 idea, structures their work in terms of blocks of intelligence and uses these blocks to construct programs. Nothin…
[flagged]
Sounds like tech debt as a service. If the code review is automated, how can you be sure the code isn't full of security or maintanability issues?
I work at a FAANG. Professionally, I have had almost no luck with it, outside of summarizing design docs or literally just finding something in the code that a simple search might not find: such is this team's code that does X? I am yet to successfully prompt it and get a working commit. Further, I will add that I also don't know any ICs personally who have successfully used it. Though, there's endless posts of peopl…
It does work sometimes. The smaller the task, the better.
It makes my work suck, sadly. Team dynamics also contributes to that, admittedly. Last year I was working on implementing a pretty big feature in our codebase, it required a lot of focus to get the business logic right and at the same time you had be very creative to make this feasible to run without hogging to much resources. When I was nearly done and worked on catching bugs, team members grew tired of waiting and…
The good thing is that the work gets much quicker than before, and it's actually a boon for that
The issue is inflated expectations
For example: If a work item ideally would take two weeks before AI, it is expected now to be done in like 2 days.
So we still need to find a sweet spot so that the expectations are not unbelievable.
MS is a mature place so they're still working on it and take our feedback seriously. at least that's what I have seen
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I may "yes, and" this: spec → plan → critique → improve plan → implement plan → code review It may sound absurd to review an implementation with the same model you used to write it, but it works extremely well. You can optionally crank the "effort" knob (if your model has one) to "max" for the code review.
A blanket follow-up "are you sure this is the best way to do it?" Frequently returns, "Oh, you are absolutely correct, let me redo this part better."
At the end of the day it’s an autocomplete. So if you ask “are you sure?” then “oh, actually” is a statistically likely completion.
As a veteran freelance developer - aside from some occasional big wins, I'd say it's been net neutral or even net negative to my productivity. When I review AI-generated code carefully (and if I'm delivering it to clients I feel that's my responsibility) I always find unnecessary complexity, conceptual errors, performance issues, looming maintainability problems, etc. If I were to let it run free, these would just co…
And then all of a sudden you’re just arguing with the terminal all day - the specs are written by gpt, delivered in-the email written by gpt. Sometimes they dont even have the time to slice their prompt from the edges of the paste but the only thing i can think of is “i need to make the most of 0.5x off peak claude rates “
Fuck.
I got lots of pretty TUIs though so thats neat